Agreed, PS4 will be impressive. Not sure what you're trying to get at with the pixel rate thing though... Do you understand what your talking about or is that just another cherry-picked spec you want to throw out there to try and convince yourself that the PS4 competes with $1000+ gaming PCs?

My system has 2.2 Tflops in its GPU and a 5 year old CPU. I believe a PS4 can match up to it or surpass it.

One thing to remember is that a console is geared to play games. So its software and hardware could be utilized to a greater extent than what someone has to go through with Windows in the middle.

Some optimization and work we could see something similar to Unreal Engine 4's Infiltrator real time demo which runs on a GTX 680(3 Tflops). Showcases many effects even from that Samaritan GDC 2012 demo. The landscape backdrop in one scene reminds me of Killzone Shadow Fall instantly. Not likely on day 1 though. At some point considering the bandwidth and all of the GPU in the system. http://www.youtube.com/watc...

console games aren't as optimized as people think. http://www.youtube.com/watc... console like performance at console like specs. Nobody wants to be stuck at just barely good enough to play performance though, just like nobody wants to have an iPhone 3g in 2013. Keep in mind that pc games get optimized over time, console games have been limited in this regard so far. Nvidia works really hard to make sure pc games run well, AMD does their best to catch up. Console makers do their best to keep you buying games and dlc, especially on the xbox where its simply ridiculous.

Another similar comparison could be android devices vs ios devices. iOS is much more closed and in theory gets much better performance, but its not nearly as different as you would think. Lets look at the galaxy s3 vs the iphone 5, the iphone 5 feels better in games, but the s3 has a gpu equivalent to the 4s in power. So then lets compare the s3 to the 4s, quite similar arent they?

whats more powerful a nintendo wii (with a penguin club subscription for the under 5's) or a 5000 dollar PC with a wireless machine gun and a vibrating chair and nipple electrodes? I just made that up actually because i'm bored . statistics show that there are less than 800 pc gamers in the whole world and 72% of them are morbidly obese and smell of wee . PS4 sounds pleasant

who the fuck cares if it cant compete with a$1000 PC, if i wanted something that powerful i would get the damn Pc , but most people cant afford it or like me dont want it. I understand its more powerful and looks prettier but idc i enjoying the console experience so fuck the PC. but if you enjoy it then good for you

I wasn't saying that PS4 SHOULD compete with a top-end gaming rig. Maybe it was a poor choice of words. Just saying that people on this site should stop grasping at straws trying make a case that that PS4 is going to possess the same raw power as one. It's just ridiculous.

I know games aren't really going to appear drastically different between the two in most cases. The extra power of a good PC isn't going to change the fact that the game assets are created at a certain detail level and anything higher is impossible (without the use of mods). The extra power does, however, allow for things like smoother frame rates, better AA, better physics, better particle effects, multi-monitor support, higher resolution, better 3D experience, etc...

A lot of that stuff doesn't matter to most gamers anyway, so I just get annoyed to see PSfanboys on this site keep throwing around various specs trying to hype up a machine that is no doubt going to be worth what it's worth, but no more. Hell, I'm probably going to get one at / close to launch but I'm not going to pretend it's something it isn't.

The Ps4 will be a great machine for the cost and exclusives we'll be getting, to make it simple for you "pc elitists" we, console gamers don't care if your 1000$ high end pc is better, to me at least, it wont be so high end when new parts come out, making you buy sh#t at least once a year to keep it ”high end". Like I posted before, all th time I see you pc dudes posting on console articles all that comes to my mind is that you seek attention no matter what, attention that you never get anywhere else but with your mother since you live in her basement. So every time I see a pc dude bragging about this and that, it'll be my duty to paste this same exact message. Ps4 4 life mofos.

I don't know anything of these tech terms, but there's only one thing I want to know... Will I be able to stream porn in HD on my console? If so, I can livestream the results to everyone, thanks to the share button.

The reason is that ps3 is just more powerful than xbox 360, but to use this power you need to invest more time into development, due to ps3 complicated architecture, something that multiplatform titles can't do, and thats why many of them are working worse on ps3 than xbox360.

In the end it doesn't matter how something works, it only matters how much power you can achieve, and with ps3 you can achive more than xbox360, but you need to be a sony in house company, like ND etc.

you're speaking the truth and people disagree with you but DigitalSmoke's comment is all wrong but people agree with him. This type of thing only happen on N4G. lol

In fact, to give more credibility to your comment just read this:

Air-Edel's Chris Green

"The roll back to x86 technology (PC technology) should make it a lot easier and quicker for studios to create and optimise cross-platform games, and get up and running quickly when the new systems come out, something that the PS3 had issues with.

"Also, I feel the x86 platform was what helped the XBox 360 get such a strong hold in the market even though the PS3 was on paper a better machine, because the developers felt more comfortable writing for it. In my opinion it was only really the PS3 exclusive games that showed off the system to its full potential."

How am I badly informed when I'm directly quoting a game developer? And that second reply of yours doesn't even makes sense because nobody's arguing that. =/

You said: "So the CPU will be able to do graphical tasks as well"

and I'm saying that you're wrong because that is the truth. That CPU is just a general purpose CPU and doesn't has SPUs so it CAN'T render graphics. You're just making that up by misinterpreting the quote.

Smoke is actually right, but when it comes to the PS3 and the Cell. The Cell was supposed to act as the CPU and GPU but bottlenecks killed the ability to do what they thought it could. That and the Cell just not having as much power as was first thought. The Cell is a major reason not to believe specs. Even the chip designers get it wrong. R & D is so expensive because of mistakes and the inability to just print chips that work right every time. It's trial and error sometimes.

AMD CPU don't do GPU functions. They help keep things in order. HSA features of AMD APUs allow the CPU and GPU to write to each other, but it is only to hand off thing best fit for each part. But I'm not sure what the limits are since I still haven't heard anyone mention if this is a full HSA chip or not. If it is, PCs will have a fight on their hands until they move to HSA parts. Once that happens, the consoles will get left far behind. But it will take a couple of years(maybe 18 months) I believe.

Smoke is smoking on the blow out of the water part though. It is more powerful. But not by a huge amount. The PS3 wasn't just more powerful. The GPU wasn't nearly as good as the one in the 360. But the Cell was much better than the CPU in the 360.

you do not know very much about SPE core's: first of all they are in fact true processing core's with direct DMA to each other SPE's Local store.

Dr. Hofstee exaplains it very well:

Cell's chief architect, Dr. H. Peter Hofstee, advised us not to characterize the SPEs as specialized co-processors, dedicated to occasional tasks such as graphics or arithmetic. In that story, we compared SPEs to the co-processors of old, and characterized them as subordinate to the principal processing element of the Cell system, the Power Processing Element (PPE), based on the existing PowerPC architecture. But in doing so, Dr. Hofstee warned, we tended toward a trap into which others have fallen, in which the role of the SPEs appears to be reduced in importance. More than just co-processors, Dr. Hofstee said, the SPEs are fully-capable processing units that are capable not only of running threads spawned off from a main program, but also running "single-core," scalar programs in their entirety - not only multithreading, but multitasking.

also this is exactly what they are describing to use the SOC of the PS4!

"“We’re trying to replicate the SPU Runtime System (SPURS) of the PS3 by heavily customizing the cache and bus,” he said. ”SPURS is designed to virtualize and independently manage SPU resources. For the PS4 hardware, the GPU can also be used in an analogous manner as x86-64 to use resources at various levels.

“This idea has 8 pipes and each pipe(?) has 8 computation queues. Each queue can execute things such as physics computation middle ware, and other proprietorially designed workflows. This, while simultaneously handling graphics processing.”"

I love how people are disagreeing with you. It's funny and just goes to show how ignorant they are. They're completely misunderstanding what Cerny is saying.

A CPU cannot render graphics, they don't work that way. CPU's do the number crunching and they prepare data for the GPU to process, etc. SPU/SPE are completely different and are NOT normal cores. The Cell only had 1 proper core.

" love how people are disagreeing with you. It's funny and just goes to show how ignorant they are. They're completely misunderstanding what Cerny is saying.

A CPU cannot render graphics, they don't work that way. CPU's do the number crunching and they prepare data for the GPU to process, etc. SPU/SPE are completely different and are NOT normal cores. The Cell only had 1 proper core."

you go on to state this:

"SPU/SPE are completely different and are NOT normal cores. The Cell only had 1 proper core."

Speak for yourself it seem's you are the one that

as you said:

just goes to show how ignorant they are. They're completely misunderstanding what Cerny is saying

Again

DR. Hofstee , you know the main person along with a team, that designed the SPE's would know what the SPE's are or are not.

Dr. Hofstee explains it very well:

Cell's chief architect, Dr. H. Peter Hofstee, advised us not to characterize the SPEs as specialized co-processors, dedicated to occasional tasks such as graphics or arithmetic. In that story, we compared SPEs to the co-processors of old, and characterized them as subordinate to the principal processing element of the Cell system, the Power Processing Element (PPE), based on the existing PowerPC architecture. But in doing so, Dr. Hofstee warned, we tended toward a trap into which others have fallen, in which the role of the SPEs appears to be reduced in importance. More than just co-processors, Dr. Hofstee said, the SPEs are fully-capable processing units that are capable not only of running threads spawned off from a main program, but also running "single-core," scalar programs in their entirety - not only multithreading, but multitasking.

they are Full processing core's the cell is a Hybrid core CPU/GPU PROCESSOR.

SPE's are not normal cores. They are able to run some of the same programs because they were designed that way, but they are NOT NORMAL CORES. The fact that they are called SPE's instead of just being called cores should have made that obvious. They are different. Just because they work in a similar fashion does not make them the same thing.